Tag Archives: Arsenal

Post navigation

Well once the dust had settled neither side emerged victorious and to be honest it was that kind of game. On the face of it I can understand how people could be quite bored watching the game until the second half when the game exploded into life, thanks to the injection of Michu into the match. But for me it was an enthralling tactical battle and one that we didn’t do so badly in as it may have appeared. Wenger sprung some real suprises with the starting lineup and while I have my doubts on why the great lumbering Mertesacker started against a team who like to attack via thru balls, I can’t fault the rest of his tactics. Ramsey may be playing out of his comfort zone as a left mid but there’s no denying he was effective at cancelling out Swansea’s usually dangerous right wing attack and also helped to keep possession in midfield. As a direct result of this, Swansea were unable to use their normal tactic of slowly pushing down the right and instead chose to fire in dangerous diagonal long balls to any of their 3 attackers. Arsenal meanwhile kept possession and played high up the pitch while Swansea sat deeper and counter-attacked.

And this is what undid us for their first goal. To put it simply, we took the bait. We were pressing forwards, playing a high line defense while Swansea happily sat back absorbing the pressure, made easy by the slow tempo of the match and then they brought on Michu. And suddenly they had a speedy attacker getting in behind our high positioned defense and the first of these diagonal long balls was pounced upon and finished off by the Spanish talent. Playing Mertesacker as the last man is always risky when playing a high line in my books and while I guess one can argue he was playing to add defensive height in the box, there is more to being good aerially than just being tall and I tend to think both Koscielny and Vermaelen are better aerial defenders than him and should’ve started this match as he had no chance of catching Michu in a foot race. What suprised me most of all is that Swansea didn’t try targeting Sagna at right back who was left isolated and unsupported by Walcott for the majority of the game and as a consequence, appeared to play poorly. Aside from looking tired I don’t think he did much wrong except for the usual lousy crossing attempts. Offensively Walcott’s movement was so random he often didn’t know where to pass to and defensively he was basically left to deal with everything thrown at him on that wing and managed the majority of it with a minimum of fuss, only helped out occasionally by Koscielny.

Our attacking formation throughout this match was uncharacteristically narrow. With Ramsey playing on the left and Walcott drifting inwards, outwards and wherever the hell he damn well pleased there was only Gibbs left to stretch Swansea’s defense even a little bit and this made our attacking efforts much harder. Little wonder then that we had very few clear cut chances in the first half and didn’t really explode into life until the second half where we suddenly started moving the ball around much quicker. Swansea’s midfield went from comfortably passing the ball around and having time to pick a pass, to being aggressively pressed and making individual mistakes as a result of the pressure. This is where we started to dominate, even before Podolski was subbed on and turned the match on its head, Swansea started panicking, lost their midfield composure and dropped deeper still to try and defend their 1-0 lead. Big mistake. Inviting that much pressure from Arsenal when you’re a top team is a bad idea. When you’re a mid-level team like Swansea it can be catastrophic and quite frankly, they were lucky we didn’t blow them completely off the park. Gibbs who had been an attacking threat all match, suddenly became a deadly force with the introduction of Podolski and Swansea’s defense buckled almost immediately. Giroud was unlucky not to bury a good chance but we never looked like not scoring and 2 in quick succession looked to have the game won, if not for some good old crappy Arsenal defending from a corner. People will blame zonal marking for the goal but really it was a lack of effort to win the ball that caused it. Szczesny did his best to make the goal bigger for Graham to score in by going to ground far too early but it doesn’t change the fact that, like the first goal this one was soft and could’ve easily been avoided with a little more enthusiasm in defense.

So overall I don’t think we did too badly except for not putting away the chances at the end that could’ve made the score a complete blowout. Gibbs was fantastic all game and together with Wilshere’s driving runs forward they spearheaded the attack. Cazorla looked a bit fatigued and could probably do with a match off and Walcott’s positioning was also a little odd for me. I don’t know if Wenger gave him free reign to roam where he pleased but against a more dangerous team, if he leaves Sagna alone like that we could be in real trouble and with Manchester City coming up it’s not something I want to see more of. This is more or less the formation we used and the blue arrows illustrate the way Swansea chose to attack.

As you can see, as a result of our pressing, Swansea were reduced to bypassing our midfield trio and using the width and their pace in behind our defense. This is something to be wary of but reflects well on our midfield. You can also see the lack of width in our attack and the lack of a forward passing option for Sagna, who unsuprisingly racked up quite a few long ball pass attempts in his match statistics. In the second half when we sped our passing up, Swansea enjoyed even less of the ball and sat deeper as they ran out of ideas, inviting the 15 minute onslaught that was made worse by the introduction of Podolski on the left wing, who drove the ball forward and allowed Gibbs to decimate their back line. We scored twice and should’ve scored more. Since many people are complaining about Bould’s preference of Zonal marking I thought I’d also cover that in this review by demonstrating the system. So let’s have a look at that moment when victory was snatched away in true smash n grab style.So if we take a look we can see how the zonal marking system works. Swansea are setup pretty basically with a near receiver to flick on the ball(next to Podolski) and 3 runners who have the task of pushing into the Arsenal goalbox once the flight of the ball is determined, meaning where they have to be to attack the ball. Arsenal have a man on either post and 3 men setup in zonal formation to block the incoming runners, challenge them aerially etc. At this point I’m a bit critical of the two men standing forwards of all this, Arteta and Walcott, since they should really be a part of the blockers wall with only 5 minutes left to play. It’s worth noting here that it is our midfielders that are closer to the goal than the defenders. There are two reasons for this. Firstly to speed up the quick counter-attack by advancing the positioning of the defenders and allowing the midfielders to pass to somebody as they sweep forwards once Arsenal have cleared the danger. And secondly to play a higher offside trap incase a player should accidently misplace a pass and leave an opposition player right in front of our goal with the ball at his feet. This goal however was just unfortunate, the red arrow on the photo shows where Podolski’s glancing header ended up and the green arrow shows the safe heading option that would’ve secured the game for us. Nothing to do with zonal marking, just a missed clearance and subsequent poor defensive work by the blockers who made no move to shut down the runners’ movement, resulting in the goal.

In conclusion this is a game we should’ve won but didn’t do anything terribly wrong in. We lacked some energy in defense and fell for a very good sucker punch when Michu scored but overall we got the basics right, successfully upped the tempo when necessary and passed the ball around better than we have in previous weeks despite the deceptive appearance of the game. If we play like that in the replay I am confident of blowing Swansea City out of the water and for now I’m content to simply look forward and await the match against Manchester City.

And finally, one more look at this, what a beautiful lobbed pass and volley!

FA Cup time! And a must-win match for Arsenal against a Swansea City side that quite frankly we didn’t turn up against last time we played and lost 2-0 to them. So assuming the players aren’t too exhausted from their disappointing match against Southampton(where they didn’t appear to use any energy) we should be in for a better contest this time around. Looking at Swansea’s recent form and efforts this season in the league it would be reasonable to expect a game in a similar mould to the recent one against Newcastle, although without the ridiculous scoreline. Let me explain.

Swansea play in a 4-2-3-1 formation, opting to attack down their right wing and through the center, prioritising thru balls as their chosen method of breaking through defenses to score. This is similar to the style Newcastle employs in attack and like them, Swansea also like to play possession football in their own half with short sharp passing and don’t heavily pressure their opponent. Where this game will differ is that Swansea have the majority of their starting eleven fit for this match and are far better at both keeping possession and holding onto a lead once they have it. And this is the biggest problem we will face against them, stopping them from scoring first. If we look throughout the season, Arsenal have done best against teams that have played somewhat erratically. By that I mean teams that have come out swinging, tried to score goals and allowed us to play counter-attack and in general, they’ve been games that are very open with end to end action, and Arsenal have simply outscored their opposition. So it stands to reason that if we manage to stop them scoring first we could do some real damage. Teams like Swansea with thru ball strategies and slightly shaky defense lines are far better suited to playing counter-attacking football so to take the lead against them would really be grabbing the initiative in this match.

Defensively is where they are weakest, Swansea have struggled to prevent teams from creating scoring opportunities this season, which is in sharp contrast to their impressive home record of last season. Their biggest weakness unfortunately for us is allowing teams to get in good positions to take long shots and conceding from set pieces, neither of which we are very good at, unless the likes of Arteta or Cazorla decide to have a ping from range(and I hope they do), so we’ll be much better off exposing the other weaknesses they have, which are winning aerial duels and dealing with tricky, skillful opposing players. To this end I think we’ll see Giroud starting at Center Forward for this one with Walcott’s pace and trickery utilised on the right wing. Swansea’s left wing isn’t particularly geared towards attacking so the chances of Walcott getting in behind their back line will be less and I would expect the game to therefore be decided from the left. Assuming Arsenal mean business in this match I’d expect Podolski and Gibbs to be too much for Swansea’s right wing to handle and although their midfield is strong, Cazorla should still be able to link up well with these two and create enough chances for Giroud to do some damage. The fact that they have trouble defending aerially will just play into Giroud’s hands all the more and I expect him to play an important role in this match.

Overall our lineup is likely to be similar to previous weeks with the exception of Walcott playing at right wing instead of center forward. However we may see a change at the back also, given that Swansea are fond of thru balls and their rather deadly player Michu is no slouch I wouldn’t be suprised to see Koscielny partnering Vermaelen at the back instead of the slower Mertesacker. I would also expect Arsenal to really come out of the blocks tonight as I believe Wenger would be most keen on giving some rest to key players like Cazorla with the match against Manchester City looming just around the corner. A tactic of going out guns blazing, taking a solid lead and then consolidating by bringing on a holding player like Ramsey may well be Wenger’s tactic for this one.

Swansea City Dangermen: Without a doubt it’s Michu. The 2 million pound Spanish wonder has been scoring goals for fun in the Premier League with 13 already and last time we played them and sat back in the final minutes he made us pay. Their right winger Hernandez must also be kept quiet.

Result Prediction: Assuming Arsenal come out to play this time I’ll say 3-2 Arsenal

Conclusion: This has the potential to be a really open ended game, both teams boast attacking firepower and questionable defensive flaws. A game where if either team doesn’t come out firing and put in the effort, the other team could really humiliate them on the scoreboard. I think Arsenal will pinch it but I’m expecting a high tempo, mistake-riddled match and a real nail biter. Fortunately this is an away match so we can rely on our mad away fan support to cheer the boys on to victory, Come On You Gunners!

This is the 3rd part of the article on the effects of Foreign ownership. If you haven’t read part 1 or part 2 yet than I’d advise you to read it before you jump into the this part. Part 1 can be found here! Part 2 can be found here!

3. Foreign ownerships effects – The pride of a nation

The National team is often the pride of a nation. In times of economic crisis people often look to their nation’s football team as a means to take their mind of the horrid reality of austerity. National games are the only time when fans of fierce rivals can put their rivalry apart and cheer for each others players. For a national team to be successful though, the league needs to supply quality youth that can elevate the national team to new heights. In this part the emphasis will be on the national team and youth and how foreign ownership effects both. It is inevitable to look at the FA’s 25-man squad rule introduced in 2010 and therefore the part on youth will focus on how effective the rule can be.

3.1 Effects on the National team – The loins of the lions

The national team is one of the things foreign ownership affects indirectly. Of course its not the aim of the owners to diminish the talent pool of the national team but it is something that occurs as a consequence. Often people claim that the failure of England to qualify for the Euro 2008 was down to the exuberant transfer made by clubs with foreign owners (Abramovich bought Chelsea in 2003 and Sinawatra bought Machester City in 2007). From the inception of the EPL in the 1992/1993 season until the time of Taylors (2007) study (2006-2007 season) the percentage of English players that start a match have dropped 47 percent. But can this drop be attributed to foreign ownership alone?

Figure taken from Walter et al., 2009

The important thing to note is that in the above graph the flurry of signings by Manchester City from 2008 onwards is not represented therefore it is hard to make a decisive conclusion. Nevertheless from the above graph we can see that since the inception of the EPL in 1992/1993 the percentage of English players in the league has decreased dramatically. In fact, in 1992 there were only 11 foreign players (foreign player here meaning players that are neither British nor Irish) playing in the entire league (Wikipedia, 2012). By 2009 this has changed dramatically: the average foreign player per team was 13 (Williams, 2009). In 1999 Chelsea were the first ever club to have a starting line up which had no British players (Inge et al., 2001) and in 2005 Arsenal was the first ever EPL club to have their team sheet of 16 players be made up of only foreign players (BBC Sport, 2005). Ironically it seems it wasn’t just foreign players who displaced their English counterparts in the EPL but the club owners as well.

According to Taylor (2007) the failure to qualify for Euro 2008 was due to the lack of English footballers in English football. He also argued that foreign ownership just compounds this effect and that it would lead to foreign management methods and increase the amount of foreign players entering the EPL. However, I respectfully disagree with this claim. First of all from the figure above it is evident that foreign players have started displacing English players before “project” type foreign owners were even in the league. Furthermore the Chelsea of 1999 and the Arsenal of 2005 were not in the hands of foreign owners. We should not however dismiss the figure above completely as it points towards a double edged sword when it comes to foreign players and management. In part 2. I have demonstrated how these players, owners, and managers enrich the EPL and make it more marketable. What the above figure shows is that it was the English players who have paid the costs of the financial success of the league. And thus the national team is also victim of this. Dobson et al. (2001) argue that the theories of the economic positives on the EPL of foreign influence outweigh the negative effects on the English national team. Whether or not this is true is politically debatable however it points to something Taylor (2007) implicitly conveyed: the incentives and interests of foreign owners are to enrich the club and the club only. This attitude could potentially hurt the national team, but it should be in the FA’s interest to curb the incentives of these owners in a manner that benefits the English National team.

Even before the FA took direct action by introducing the ’25-player’ rule there was an essence of caution about the number of foreign players in the EPL. In 1999 the department that controls immigration in England, made the rules tougher to slow down the pace of foreign players being introduced in the EPL. It has to be noted that these attempts were not too successful as they could be only applied to non-EU citizens since EU law as outlined by the Maastricht treaty (1991) is about promoting freedom of labour movements and thus a work permit to play football in England is automatically given to all EU footballers. However the intent is clear that it was in response to the concern that English footballers were overlooked by clubs.

In 2010 the FA took direct action against the trend of foreign players displacing English ones by introducing the 25-man rule. The 25 man rule basically states that the 25-man squad of an EPL side must be compromised of, a minimum of eight ‘home grown’ players where a “home grown player is defined as one who, irrespective of his nationality or age, has been registered with any club affiliated to the Football Association or the Welsh Football Association for a period, continuous or not, of 3 entire seasons or 36 months prior to his 21st birthday (or the end of the season during which he turns 21)” (English Premier League, 2012).

3.2 The 25-man rule and youth development – problem solver or problem creator?

The 25-man rule could be looked at as a way by which the FA wanted to promote investment in youth by the teams. It was an effort made by the FA after England’s failure to qualify for Euro 2008. The reason this article has to look at this rule in detail is to determine whether or not the 25-man rule was able to curb the investments of foreign owned clubs in a manner that they invest in youth development.

The first issue with the 25-man squad rule is the arbitrary number of 25. The reasoning behind this is that with such a limit, as the season progresses and injuries are piled up the managers will have to dip into their academy as they could have an unlimited number of Under-21 names on their team sheet. Thus youth will be used more by the managers. The fault with this reasoning is that it means that the most talented U21s who are 1 or 2 seasons away from being introduced to the team won’t be sent on full season loans if any loans at all as the managers will want to play it safe and keep them at home. However injuries in some areas might not occur and some of these young players will lose a year of footballing experience and might eventually miss out on the first team completely if they don’t get any first team football. Therefore this rule might actually affect the most promising youth in an adverse way instead of benefiting them due to the nature of injuries and suspensions being unpredictable.

The other issue is that the teams with money will have the possibility to go and buy players in the January transfer window: The teams with a lot of liquidity behind them can afford to buy someone in the January transfer window when injuries are piling up. However the team has to make sure they have a free spot on their 25-man squad unless they buy a player who is British. This leads me to my main gripe with the rule: it inflates home-grown players prices. One just needs to look at the recent price tags of the English/British players to see this: Andy Carroll (£35million); Jordan Henderson (£15,8 million); Joe Allen (£ 16,7 million); Stewart Downing (£20 million)

Home grown players are a double edged sword when it comes to promoting the national squad. Players such as Cesc Fábregas and Nicklas Bendtner counted as home grown players despite the fact they are not playing for the England national squad. However their presence in the youth academy definitely had a positive effect on other youth prospects. As one coach from the Premier Academy League put it: “There‟s a transfer, there‟s an obvious transfer, because they [foreign players] will come and people will put them on a pedestal and say that they are technically more gifted . . . but they have to come in and get up to the speed of our game and learn to do everything that they do at our intensity, our tempo. But we have the transfer the other way of their calmness on the ball, the creation of space, that first touch, their decision making . . . it works both ways, and to simplify it, I think it‟s a physicality one way, and a technicality the other way” (Elliot, 2009). This exchange is often termed ‘feet exchange’. Long story short: the presence of foreign youth players in the academy raise the bar for indigenous players as well and thus has an overall positive effect. This doesn’t mean all English players who were training with Spanish young midfielders will come through the system, it merely means that the players who have the right mix of physicality and technicality will rise among the ranks.

What I think the FA was hoping to achieve with increasing the pool of home grown players is naturalisation of top footballers. Naturalisation occurs when a player is eligible to play for a different national team but instead chooses to play for England. This is essentially what happened with Carl Jenkinson. Arsenal bought Jenkinson because they needed a young Right Back who could take over from Bacary Sagna in the long run and not be counted as a foreigner in the 25 man squad. This allowed Jenkinson to raise the eyebrows of Roy Hodgson after some good performances on the pitch and the FA naturalised Jenkinson snatching him from the Finnish FA. (Wilfred Zaha of Crystal Palace was also naturalised) So its a win-win for the club and the FA. The FA gets a new English player and the club gets a free spot on their 25-man squad sheet. Now the problem with this is that the players who are willing to naturalise for England are the ones whose nations football team is even worse. Arteta has been in England and not featured for Spain yet but he has stated he would not want to play for England. What I am trying to convey is that naturalisation has its limits as well.

Ever since the 25-man rule has been in place the academies of the big clubs suddenly began to grow. On the surface this seems like a success of the 25-man rule and to some extent it is the case; however it polarised the league even more. Club managers are not stupid and they soon realised that the best way to fool the current rules is to start signing players when they are 16 years old rather than scout them and then only sign them when they turn 20 if they are good enough. If these players are not good they could be sold anyway. Now this all costs money which means the teams with the most resources will have the largest youth squad. Chelseas youth academy has increased dramatically over the past couple of years (but this did not stop them from investing large amounts of cash into their senior squad). Therefore with the help of the 25-man rule the effects of foreign ownership started to creep into the youth system. Now for the England national team this might be a good thing; however it came at the cost of essentially creating a carbon copy of the EPL at a youth level, where financial background is starting to be an increasingly dominant factor.

So while it would appear that the FA and the English Premier League in general are aware of all these recent impacting factors and both the positive and negative effects that foreign ownership’s are having on the league, the key question at the end of this saga is: What realistically can be done about it and where are these choices inevitably leading us? What future consequences do these outside influences hold for the England national team and the mid-level teams of the Premier league that are the very ‘essence’ of the game? While these questions will be answered in time, for now at least it seems that money really does talk in the football world and sadly a lot of the smaller teams that have made this league so fiercely competitive over the past decade may find the road ahead much tougher to travel without healthy financial backing, while a few less fortunate teams may find themselves fading into obscurity as transfer fees continue to rise and it becomes harder and harder for the average team in England’s famous league to attract quality players.

And we are through! All 3 parts are online for you guys to read. If you missed Part 1 where I looked at the different types of foreign ownerships than click here!If you want to give Part 2 a read again (which focused on transfer prices and wages and how foreign ownership affected it) then click here!

Wow, what a cracking match! While we may have just witnessed some of our best and worst football that we’ve played this season, there’s no denying that it was entertaining. As I discussed in my match preview, Newcastle unsuprisingly changed their formation to a 4-5-1 to better deal with the threat posed by our midfield trio. Before the 1st whistle this showed the respect they had for the capabilities of our midfield and as a direct result of the middle being stifled, both teams opted to attack through the wings, with much of Arsenal’s offense channeled through Podolski and Gibbs on the left. Weirdly both teams stood off each other and gave the players room to play and despite an early chance for Chamberlain, Newcastle had the better of the chances in the first half, while Arsenal were reduced to playing counter-attacking football and managed to take the lead with a good run and finish from Walcott after Podolski picked out his run. Podolski in particular was a constant threat to Newcastle but for all the movement down that wing it was still Newcastle creating more dangerous plays with the exception of their final passes.

Most uncharacteristically of late, both our fullbacks had a bad game defensively, with Sagna and Gibbs both caught out on multiple occasions. Koscielny also looked rusty after his time off injured and coughed up the ball several times, while Vermaelen by contrast was pretty consistent throughout. The goal we conceded before half time from a set piece, will go down as Wilshere’s fault for ducking and turning his head but with the recent head trauma suffered by Van Persie who can blame him? Wilshere’s a brave lad but he must’ve been fearing for his life after Ferguson’s revelations early in the week on the danger of a ball striking a players face. Clearly Newcastle’s players should be arrested for attempted manslaughter, first Van Persie, now Wilshere, who’s next? Back on topic, Szczesny’s setting of the wall could’ve been far better and this contributed to the goal along with Arsenal’s penchant for using the shortest players in the wall. Oh and maybe Wilshere will just cop the hit next time.

So on to the second half and this is where the game’s tempo suddenly jumped. Wenger must’ve told the players at half time to get tight to Newcastle’s players and deny them room to play because that’s exactly what they did and suddenly the momentum shifted. If not for some poor decision making from Wilshere and Walcott in the final third, Arsenal could’ve been out of sight within 15 minutes. Newcastle to their credit, refused to go quietly and despite 2 good goals from Arsenal the drew level twice, the first time through the most shambolic Arsenal defending I’ve seen in a while and the second time through a defensive error and a great finish.The most interesting stat in this match was the lack of involvement by Arteta, who had only 59 touches, his lowest all season. The other more worrying stat was the lack of support given to their fullback by either winger which contributed to the goals conceded. Offensively speaking though, Arsenal were irrepressible, Newcastle were on tired legs after playing United 3 days earlier but instead of empathy, Arsenal were ruthless. The sharks smelt blood in the water and went into a feeding frenzy.

Now while I’ve mentioned that the lack of early goals was partly to do with Wilshere and in particular Walcott’s poor choices in the final third, not all of this is his fault. With Walcott up top, Arsenal were playing a 4-2-3-1 and with Cazorla playing too far from the double pivot, Arsenal were not keeping possession enough in the middle of the pitch to create the sort of chances Walcott needed and in turn, Walcott was not dropping deep enough to help win the ball and dominate the midfield battle. That’s because if you were to typify Walcott in a forward role you would say he’s a Striker, not a Center Forward and therefore isn’t accustomed to dropping deep into the midfield from a central role. When Giroud was subbed on late, the effect was immediate. With Giroud dropping deeper and aiding Cazorla, Arsenal suddenly looked like a new team. Factor in Newcastle’s tiredness and it’s no wonder we ripped them apart in the final minutes and I wish to god Giroud’s third shot had gone in rather than hit the post but still, 6 touches of the ball for 3 shots, 2 on target and 2 goals is not a bad return for our sexy frenchman. But it was Walcott who will grab the spotlight for his hat-trick and 2 assists and it’s hard to argue with the quality of finishing(and 1 beautiful cross) on display for those 3 goals, though the same can be said for Giroud. There’s no doubt in my mind that Podolski’s technical solidity, workrate and attacking efforts in the first half wore Newcastle down but in the end the flood gates opened once Walcott shifted to the right wing and along with Giroud, their combined movement completely confused the defense and had Newcastle chasing shadows in the final phase of the match, ultimately destroying them. All in all this was a strange match with Newcastle playing the possession football and Arsenal for a change, playing a deadly counter-attacking strategy.

I realise it’s hard to criticise a team when they score 7 but with matches against both Manchester City and Chelsea looming in the New Year I feel I should highlight some problem areas made apparent in this game. Firstly the 2nd goal scored by Newcastle was catastrophically poor positioning in defense. This in-game shot shows you everything you need to know. Even before Sagna is beaten far too easily, Wilshere is caught out jogging back slowly rather than realising the problem and getting tight to the player in the middle Gibbs is marking and Gibbs is unaware of the unmarked player at the back post who scores a tap in uncontested.

For the 3rd goal Gibbs was guilty of again leaving a player unmarked at the back post and despite a wonderful first time volley from Demba Ba, no striker should be given that kind of freedom. So onto the attacking errors we made. Or rather, the poor choices. The choice the player made is marked in red, while the green shows the choice they should’ve made and the player they needed to work with.

It may not matter missing these chances when you stick 7 past your opponent but against a tougher team where chances are fewer, these kind of poor decisions will often hurt you on the scoreboard. Overall I think the players tried a little too hard to give thru balls to Walcott, Podolski sent several balls that resembled a missile in pace, whizzing his way, while Arteta made a few 50 yard long balls to him and in general the tactic didn’t work. The chemistry on the wings is also questionable. While Gibbs and Podolski doubtless work well together I have my suspicions about Chamberlain and Sagna as a partnership. I couldn’t help but notice during the match how Gibbs and Podolski would either give a back slap, high five or yell encouragement to each other whereas on the other wing when Chamberlain played a pass to where he thought Sagna would run he was rewarded with a “what the fuck” stare instead. I’m still not sold on Walcott up front despite the hat-trick and if anything I believe he is a good plan B to have. Wilshere’s lack of determination to shoot was frustrating yet again and our defensive efforts need to sharpen up a bit before we take on the big boys. I also feel it’s important that we keep Walcott during the summer transfer window, both for his ability and to prove that we can hold onto our players. Whether it be for playing as a striker or in his proper role on the right wing, I don’t care. Just sign the damn thing.

Finally I’m disappointed that after 3 wins in a row, the home crowd were just as silent as ever. The sooner these useless yobs are thrown from their seats and replaced with boistrous, thunderously loud fans the better. Time now for the team to get ready for Southampton and dish out another thumping, Come On You Gunners!

So the Toon Army is coming to the Emirates! And on the back of 3 wins in a row this is another must-win to get 3 valuable points before we head into an extremely torrid list of fixtures in January where it’s reasonable to expect we will drop a few points. By contrast to our recent form, Newcastle are not currently enjoying their season and with our team well rested thanks to a screwup with the trains at Christmas and with an energy sapping 3-4 loss to Manchester United just 3 days ago for the toons, now is the perfect time to hit them hard.

Newcastle’s suprisingly poor form this season owes a lot to what I call “Arsenalitis”. This is a condition where the team lacks proper depth and suffers injuries to several key players right when they go up against tough opposition. This usually leaves the team with less offensive power and a shaky back line. In Newcastle’s case they are missing the defensive solidity of Steve Taylor, the playmaking skills of Yohan Cabaye and the star quality of Hatem Ben Arfa on the left wing. So what does this mean for Arsenal? Well let’s look at how they like to play first of all. Newcastle have been favoring playing through the middle with Arfa out injured, they like to retain possession in their own half and attack fairly quickly, using either long balls or thru balls. I think the most telling factor in this match will be whether Alan Pardew opts for playing Newcastle’s standard 4-4-2 formation or the occasionally used 4-5-1 with Cisse on the right wing. Very few teams have dared to play more than one striker against Arsenal this season and most that have learned quickly that it is a mistake. Reading changed to a 4-5-1 after half time to stem the goal flow and even Manchester United who are the undisputed kings of playing 4-4-2 in the Premier League, changed to a 4-5-1 with Rooney dropping deeper to pick up Arteta and make life hard for our midfield.

The only team thus far this season to play a 4-4-2 against us somewhat successfully was Spurs and Adebayor’s stupidity ended that problem for us pretty early on. So if Newcastle do end up playing a 4-4-2 against us I predict that they’ll realise their error fairly early and switch to a 4-5-1 to try and nullify the effectiveness of our midfield trio. This isn’t bad news for us either way as it would mean taking Cisse away from our goalbox and leaving Demba Ba as the only main threat. It’s likely that the combined skills of Arteta, Wilshere and Cazorla will be too much for Newcastle’s midfield without Cabaye and I would expect their reaction to be sending even more long balls than normal towards Demba Ba, which is why it is vital to have either Vermaelen or Koscielny man-marking Ba and the wings and this provides a selection headache for Wenger. With Koscielny fit and rested, does he stay with the combination of Mertesacker and Vermaelen? Or does he instead play Vermaelen and Koscielny at the back. Newcastle have enjoyed good success this season by playing thru balls for Demba Ba and although they haven’t been great at beating a well organised offside trap, it only takes one to make you pay the price. Per Mertesacker’s greatest weakness is his lack of pace and against a team utilising this tactic he may not be the best choice at the back. He was caught out last match against Wigan in this manner, which we very nearly paid the price for and with Demba Ba taking the shot we probably would pay dearly. Mertesacker is also not as good in the air as Koscielny and since Newcastle will be attacking both with the aforementioned thru balls and also long balls I don’t see him as a great choice for this encounter although Arsene Wenger does suscribe heavily to the theory of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”when it comes to his defensive selections. This would be an even more dangerous selection if Newcastle choose to play a 4-4-2 and have both Cisse and Ba looking for thru balls.

Looking further forwards we can analyse where the potential for Newcastle’s destruction lies. Steve Taylor may be out but their defense are still a physical bunch and due to this I would expect Giroud to start up front, using his power and intelligent movement to break up their defense. Meanwhile on the right wing I would expect Walcott to start although this may not be our best avenue of attack, since he’ll be facing off against Davide Santon, a youngster who I regard as one of the best left backs in the league and certainly their most consistent defender. Without Ben Arfa supporting him the wing will be less dangerous to defend and if Walcott keeps a high line it’s possible he can be exposed but I think it’s far more practical to target Danny Simpson on the other wing and to this end I would hope to see both Gibbs and Podolski heavily involved in this match, particularly if they play the attack-minded Papiss Cisse as Simpson’s support in a 4-5-1 formation.

There’s no reason why we can’t also attack through the middle but I expect Newcastle to try and stifle the center since that will be their own avenue and as a result Cazorla will drift towards Podolski where the space will hopefully be. Defensively Newcastle have been poor of late and Wilshere’s bursts forward can certainly cause problems for them but the majority of play should be centered on crosses from the left wing unless Walcott decides to have “one of those days” and rip Santon apart. Overall I think both teams will score but as we tend to make less individual errors, have much fresher players and a tighter defense than Newcastle at the moment, I would expect Arsenal to emerge victorious at the final whistle. If Newcastle prove to be too fatigued to make a match of it, this is a game where Walcott’s pace in behind from the right could prove devastating. If the defense doesn’t get tight to him they will pay a hefty price.

Newcastle United Dangermen: Demba Ba and Cisse. Ba has been a big goal threat this season with 11 goals already and Cisse has the ability to turn on the skills at any time. Neither player must be underestimated or left unmarked in the box for a second.

Result Prediction: I think Arsenal’s offensive capability and lack of injuries to key players will give them the edge in this one. Both teams will probably score so I’ll say 3-1 Arsenal.

Conclusion: Newcastle are tired from battling United just 3 days earlier. The Emirates crowd have been louder of late and on the back of 3 wins in a row, they should spur our boys on well. Expect an early battle for control of the middle with occasional wing attacks from Arsenal and thru balls towards Demba Ba. Once the game’s tempo is decided, Newcastle will most likely opt for a long ball game while Arsenal concentrate the majority of their attacking through the left side of the field. Right then, let’s get behind the team and enjoy the match, Come On You Gunners!

A decent away win for Arsenal, though a clean sheet was carelessly thrown away. We were once again guilty of not firing straight out of the blocks, causing some early shaky defensive moments before settling into our rhythm and dominating possession and the match. Reading made this easier for us by producing what was probably their worst 45 minutes this season in the first half and I’m sure United’s players are wishing this was the Reading they played the week before when they escaped with a 4-3 win. One has to wonder if that 7-5 defeat in the League Cup was maybe preying on their mind as Reading showed Arsenal far too much respect, allowing our midfield trio of Arteta, Wilshere and Cazorla far too much space to move and pass the ball and in return they rightfully ripped Reading’s defense apart.

Wenger sprung a bit of a suprise in his team selection, starting Oxlade Chamberlain on the right wing and placing Walcott as the Center Forward. In my Match Preview I mentioned that Reading’s defense had conceded more goals from counter-attacking and thru balls than any other and what better way to exploit that than with the fastest player in the Premier League? Add to this the fact Giroud had a minor injury and Gervinho is in the naughty corner after his efforts against Bradford and it’s easy to see why Wenger would select Walcott in this role. Nevertheless I can see the headlines forming about “Arsenal bending to Walcott’s contract demands” and all the other conspiratorial Bullshit. The combined pace of Walcott, Podolski and Oxlade Chamberlain proved deadly against Reading however so full credit to Wenger for this change in tactics.

Playing Walcott in this role also had an effect on our formation. Instead of our usual 4-4-1-1, Arsenal played a 4-5-1 but I was quite impressed with the fact Walcott continually dropped deep to help build the attack. The trio of Arteta, Wilshere and Cazorla that we waited so long to see is starting to build nicely with a significant increase in passes between the three of them, suggesting they are starting to get on the same wavelength. The buildup for Cazorla’s third goal was a perfect highlight of this understanding with all of them involved and Podolski providing a good assist also. That goal to me was classic Arsenal, a quick incisive pass from midfield, good buildup play with runners on the edge of the box before a perfectly placed low cross was tapped in at the far post. It was also really good to see Podolski getting far more involved than he has been in previous weeks, making me wonder if perhaps he’s been playing with a niggling muscle injury or similar. While Cazorla will rightly get Man of the Match for his hattrick and great attacking play. he owes a lot of this to Podolski’s great movement. Time and again as Arsenal broke forwards, Podolski drew 2 or more defenders before either releasing Gibbs or passing back inside to our unmarked players, of which Cazorla was the man who best understood how to exploit the space. Looking at the stats, Podolski and Cazorla combined for 10 key passes, 4 goals and 3 assists between them, truly a magnificent performance and partnership by them and the best I can remember since our 2-0 win when we made Liverpool our bitch.

The other reason for Podolski’s resurgence might be Wilshere, who has given this side what it has lacked since Diaby hobbled off against Chelsea and went back to banging the nurses in our hospital ward. Wilshere’s taken it on himself to drive the ball forwards out of midfield, something he shouldn’t really have to do all the time but has managed to do anyway. Rosicky did this last season from a more advanced position and it’s what Cazorla needs to start doing also. The man is magic with the ball at his feet but he needs to stop dropping so deep and be available as a diagonal pass for Arteta or Wilshere, in order to bring the ball forward with Wilshere running off him and giving the opposing defense too much to deal with. In this game, Cazorla performed this better but in previous matches I believe this has been a factor of Podolski’s limited influence on matches by drawing Cazorla further away from him, making those exquisite tika taka style passes we saw at the start of the season from them, much harder.

This shows how our shape should’ve looked both when we have possession and when we don’t.

You can see how this brings Cazorla and Podolski closer together and it’s this factor that is crucial to Arsenal’s success of late. Every match that they have linked up in, Arsenal have been impressive. Essentially we should be trying to play a sort of 4-1-4-1 when attacking, with either Arteta or Wilshere staying back as an anchor and the other 2 mids(usually Cazorla and Wilshere) pushing forwards, becoming left and right attacking mids and running into the channels in and around the box, overloading the opposition’s defense like the Arsenal of old. You’ll notice that this isolates Chamberlain somewhat but in this match it didn’t matter as he was able to single-handedly rip up Reading’s defense regardless and if not for some poor finishing, would’ve certainly bagged a goal.

So on to the bad bits. We were not as defensively solid as we have been in our past few matches, for the first 10 minutes of the match Reading looked dangerous and we were slow to close them down and deny space. We also conceded two more rubbish goals to add to the collection, one from a terribly lax pass from Gibbs, who was caught out several times in this match playing Reading onside. And a second from Podolski tracking a runner back past the offside trap which I put down to inexperience. He’s not a defender so he’s less familiar with staying in line with the last defender than any of our back 4. Two technical errors, two rubbish goals and not good enough for Arsenal. The renewed fight in Reading during the second half had a lot to do with McDermott changing their formation from 4-4-2, to a 4-5-1 in order to put an extra man in midfield to try and cope with our wonderful trio. Wenger bringing on Ramsey for Chamberlain ended this revolt by having Ramsey drift inwards towards Wilshere and once more stacking the midfield numbers in our favour. It also forced Reading to come further forward to try and win the ball and resulted in the inevitable counter-attack for Walcott’s goal. Walcott was reasonably impressive playing as a striker sitting on the last defender but he lacked finishing quality for his chances. He could’ve had a hattrick in this match and while he’s a great plan B in the absence of a real striker, I think I still prefer him on the wing at this point.

On a final note, the stats from both this game and the one against West Brom reveal a very interesting fact. The average Arsenal player has managed a passing accuracy of about 86-88% this season with Arteta, Mertesacker topping the charts with 92.6% each. As these two are the men who pass the ball out from the back and start our attacks this is unsuprising but what does stand out is that in the last 2 matches, with the exception of these two that passing accuracy has dropped to about an average of 83%. Yet Arsenal have managed more possession, created more key passes and looked far more dangerous in these two matches, which suggests to me that we’re trying to be more incisive with our passing and taking more risks in order to create chances. This is really good news as nobody wants to see a toothless Arsenal knock the ball around for 90 minutes with hardly a shot in anger and I’d put a lot of it down to the increasing chemistry of our midfield trio, who have the ability to be one of the best midfield combinations in the Premier League.

We travel to Wigan next so there’ll be more rousing choruses from our incredible away fans. Let’s hope this is the start of something good heading into Christmas. Let’s do what we did to Reading and leave Wigan feeling like they’ve been kicked in the balls…

With the transfer window looming in 2 weeks it seems we may have a clearer picture to who we maybe seeing at the emirates…………or be linked with various names once again. Eurosport.fr (link below) believes Arsenal are the front runners of trying to sign Etienne Capoue from Toulouse in France. Why is this so key for Arsenal? Because he maybe the solution to a recurring problem in AFC where we have not had a player to stop the gap in midfield (most possibly he’d be a solution to the problem that is Abou Diaby and his injuries.).

Taking a closer look at Capoue, he ticks all the boxes for what Arsenal need at the moment in terms of a midfielder who is able to control the midfield and give his team mates the space to create the opportunities in attack. He is a very intimidating figure in the middle of the park for Toulouse and doesn’t shy away from going into challenges, a very physically imposing midfielder who make sure his defensive duties are first before anything else. A quick glance at his show that he’s one of the best players in the midfield (only behind Matuidi):

Defensive:

Apps=16

Total

Per game

Tackle

38

2.4

Interceptions

37

2.3

Fouls

26

1.6

Off Won

5

0.3

Clearances

106

6.6

Was Dribbled

7

0.4

Blk Shots

7

0.4

Offensive:

Apps=16

Total

Per Game

Goals

3

–

Assists

2

–

Shots

23

1.4

Key Passes

13

0.8

Dribbles

14

0.9

Fouled

46

2.9

Offside

–

–

Dispossessed

25

1.6

Turn Overs

19

1.2

Passing:

Apps=16

Total

Per Game

Key Passes

–

0.8

Avg. Passes

–

67.9

Pass Suc%

–

80.8

Accurate Long Balls

128/204

8

Accurate Through Balls

1/4

0.1

While he’s not the most offensive minded player he does keep his own area very tidy and provides a position for his team mates to dictate the play. If you look at his stats more closely though you will see his long passes are very good (he completes an average of 8 long passes per game) it shows that his passes are a bit underrated ( though Arsenal don’t play a long ball style it should still give us a better understanding that he can pick out a pass which is key for the style that Arsenal play). Overall, this would be a good signing for Arsenal, he fits the bill for a good defensive minded midfielder but does he actually take the place of Diaby? Perhaps not, mostly due to the fact he’s extremely defensive minded but at this moment in time that is what Arsenal need, a player with the ability to create from the back whilst keeping things tidy and creating the occasional play or two. The stumbling block here is the apparent transfer fee of Capoue which is rumoured to be around 13-14 million euros but it should be noted that Capoue is looking to play in the Champions League and our lure of Champions League football should be able to secure this signing. If Capoue is able to come in to the Emirates it will be a giant step towards a positive direction.

OK so here we go again in this roller coaster season we’re having. On paper Arsenal should have no trouble travelling to Reading and knocking the stuffing out of them but how often do things actually pan out the way they should? So let’s take a look at what Reading bring to the plate since the last time we played resulted in an epic 7-5 victory for Arsenal in the League Cup, which is unlikely to happen again…

Brian McDermott’s Reading side attacks in an interesting and innovative way. They use the width of the park to stretch the defense and create crossing opportunities much like Arsenal do but then they utilise their forwards to pull the defense out of position by drifting wide and working the channels, taking the Center Back with them, before pulling the ball back for their midfielders to score from the edge of the area. While this is their primary tactic they also field strong independent strikers in Roberts, Hunt and Le Fondre. Their standard formation of 4-4-2 includes 2 of these threats for Arsenal’s Center Backs to contain, as all three are quite capable of bringing the ball down on their own and turning a defender to shoot. Whichever Center Back pairing Wenger chooses will have to be very alert and quick to shutdown any long range shooting from both the strikers and midfielders if we’re to win this game comfortably.

Looking at the last time we played them and the way that we were shockingly down by 0-4 before halftime is actually quite comforting. The primary problem in this match for Arsenal(besides appearing to be hungover) was the weak secondary defense of Jenkinson, Djourou, Koscielny, Miguel and Martinez, that we fielded for the league cup and boy did I feel sorry for Koscielny having to be paired with that lump. Yet Reading deployed their strongest team and still managed to blow a 4-0 lead. This suggests that they are not good at holding onto a win, evidenced further with their 3-4 loss to United the other week and the fact they’ve lost their last 5 matches. A lot of Arsenal’s problems last time stemmed from having a poor defensive line and Martinez(our 4th choice keeper) in goal. Reading found it incredibly easy to run overlaps past our fullbacks and deliver crosses for Roberts to create chances from. Against the likes of Sagna, Mertesacker, Vermaelen and Gibbs this is far less likely to happen. Particularly with Szczesny also in goal, so we can expect to concede far less stupid goals like the one’s Reading scored that day. I tend to think the primary threat that Reading carry is their scoring from set pieces, 37% of their goals this season have come from this and given Arsenal’s poor record at defending these it’s something we need to be very wary of. While it’s true that Arsenal have become much more solid at defending corners over recent times, freekicks from dangerous positions still fill me with dread. United learnt just last week how deadly Reading can be from these and I believe this will be the main test for Arsenal to maintain a clean sheet.

The best news for Arsenal is that while Reading can score goals, they can’t defend them to save their lives. In particular their penchant for playing possession football in their opponent’s half, coupled with their inability to retain possession for long periods of time makes them extremely vulnerable to counter-attacking football, something that Arsenal do very well. Despite being good at defending set pieces their defense isn’t as organised as it should be leading to a vulnerability against through balls and rather suprisingly a weakness for winning aerial duels. With this in mind I really hope Giroud is sufficiently fit enough to start this match, we saw in the League Cup match against Reading how he changed things after subbing on, quickly ripping their defense to shreds with his intelligent runs off the ball and sending them into disarray for Walcott to take advantage of. This may also be a game for Podolski to redeem himself somewhat in the eyes of Arsenal fans since the last few matches he has appeared invisible on the pitch for unknown reasons. The talent is there for all to see but the desire and hunger seems to be lacking, which I suppose goes for almost the entire team at the moment.

Overall I believe this is a game we should win and win well, which will be dictated by how Reading approach this game. Will they respect Arsenal’s attacking firepower and sit deep in 2 defensive banks of 4 hoping to hit us hard on the counter-attack through the speed of their wingers? Or will they try to play their possession game in our own half despite going up against one of the toughest midfields in the Premier League and having one of the lowest average match possession stats in the league of 41%? The former seems more likely and while on the counter Reading carry an offensive threat, with Vermaelen increasingly looking like the “Verminator” again and not a mouse and the ever impressive Mertesacker, we should have a strong back line further reinforced by the in-form Szczesny. Reading didn’t have to deal with the likes of Wilshere, Arteta and Cazorla last time and I truly believe we carry too much firepower for them to prevent us scoring a few goals. Just don’t let Gervinho start at Center Forward… And for the love of god, please let us have an offensive option on the bench just incase, not Gervinho!

Reading Dangermen: Roberts, Hunt, two offensive threats up front that warrant close attention but the biggest threat is Nicky Shorey, the defender responsible for delivering Reading’s dangerous set pieces.

Result Prediction: I don’t see either team keeping a clean sheet unless Arsenal produce a vintage performance. I’ll say 4-2 Arsenal.

Conclusion: Playing away to Reading means our mad away supporters will get behind the team just like they did in the League Cup match. Arsenal should possess to much firepower for Reading to deal with, there are doubts on if Walcott will start but Oxlade Chamberlain has looked impressive lately and should do a fine job. Overall this should be a good match for our team to gain some confidence from by securing the 3 points. Come On You Gunners!

This is the 2nd part of the article on the effects of Foreign ownership. If you haven’t read part 1 yet than I’d advise you to read it before you jump into the this part. Part 1 can be found here!

2. Foreign ownerships effects – The Externalities of Business football

As I have outlined in part 1 foreign ownership is unfair in nature as the fans do not know if the owner will look at the club as a project (which lets face it most fans would love), nor does the owner sign a pledge to act in the best interest of the club. Some owners might just be there to siphon whatever money is left in the club. But these issues only look at the club itself (partial analysis) and don’t mention what effect the actions of sugar daddy’s have on the league and the national team which the owners don’t account for (general analysis). From this point onwards when referring to foreign ownership I mean ”project” type ownership as this has an external effect which is felt the most even if only a small portion of teams are under this type of ownership in the league at hand.

2.1 Effects on the league (economics, marketability, quality) – It’s all about the money, money, money.

Since I finished Part 1 by looking at the different types of ownership and how they look at the league I shall start by looking at how the exuberant attitude of business ownership might have external effects. Please note that this section will look at externalities/external effect, which means that the owners don’t necessarily want these things to occur and might not even account for them. Another thing to note is that these externalities might be positive for the league) and might be negative. Since in part 1 I concluded that “project” ownership is neutral to the financial success of the league the owners won’t mind these externalities occurring and will not do much (if anything) against it. Whether “project”ownership actually takes a neutral stance or not is definitely up for debate but the assumption of neutrality makes the analysis of externalities simpler.

According to Nauright et al. (2010) the EPL is now a highly commercialised league thanks to foreign ownership. And indeed if we just look at televising deals we will see that the televising rights for 2013-2016 cost BSkyB and BT an astounding £3 billion. This figure is huge by itself but if we compare it to the value of the first EPL televising deal (1992-1997) of £191 million it is evident that the EPL has turned into a marketable league. The reason the EPL has rose in marketability is due to the fact that the “foreign players and managers that are involved in the EPL are generally of an extremely high quality” (Del Bosque, 2010). And indeed it is the quality of the players, managers and ultimately the teams, which make a league attractive but does the league reap the benefits or only the club with the well off owner? The answer is yes.

Length

Total Value (£mn)

Games covered

Per year (£mn)

Per game (£mn)

Broadcaster

92-97

191

60

38.20

0.64

BSkyB

97-01

670

60

167.50

2.79

BSkyB

01-04

1200

110

400.00

3.64

BSkyB

04-07

1024

138

341.33

2.47

BSkyB

07-10

1706

138

568.67

4.12

BSkyB and Setanta

10-13

1782

138

594.00

4.30

BSkyB and Setanta/ESPN

13-16

3018

154

1006.00

6.53

BSkyB and BT

The smaller teams benefit from the marketability of the league as well but ONLY because the televising rights are negotiated and distributed centrally. “Domestic broadcast revenue is divided on a 50:25:25 basis; 50% is divided equally between the clubs; 25% is awarded on a merit basis determined by a club’s final league position and the final 25% is distributed as a facilities fee for the number of matches shown on television involving the club.” (English Premier League Website). International broadcast revenue is distributed equally among the 20 teams. Therefore this is a huge positive externality for foreign ownership but only due to the fact that televising rights are negotiated and distributed centrally by the EPL.

It can be argued that a league full of well managed teams would have a high marketability as well but it is definitely undisputed that foreign ownership can act as a catalyst to speed up the rate at which this occurs. The value of the broadcasting deals of the EPL have increased exponentially in the past couple of years and this is to a large extent thanks to the presence of 2 “project” owned teams in the league. However I can’t emphasise enough that it is only a positive externality due to the central bargaining process of broadcasting rights. If these rights would be negotiated on a team-by-team basis the benefits of league marketability could only be reaped by the teams with owners willing to invest in the squad.

This commercialisation of the league allowed foreign owners to focus on a number of different revenue streams which include television rights (apart from the EPL which is negotiated centrally), premium seating options, club branding and other goods and services related (Nauright et al., 2010). The increase in foreign ownership increases the money involved in the league and thus the ability for the league to attract high profile players. This is one of the underlying reasons why the value of broadcasting rights has increased exponentially: the more marketable names are in the league the more value it can fetch in the market. However it is important to note that these marketable players should be dispersed in the league more or less evenly. If the title competition is shared by many teams (top 6 last year) and the season is only decided until very late into the season (last day of the season last year) the more the league can ask for its broadcasting rights.

Another interesting point Nauright et al. (2010) makes is that the increase in foreign ownership is linked to the commodification of the EPL (just to clarify commodification basically means turning something into a ‘commodity’. A Marxian example is commodification of labour in capitalism which means that in order for labour to survive in a capitalist system they have to sell their expertise, essentially commodifying themselves). The intriguing point this implies is that although “project” ownership catalyses the process of commodifying a league (by making it marketable), by doing so it attracts other foreign investors to the league who are not necessarily of the “project” type. Therefore in the EPL Abramovich’s attitude towards Chelsea FC initiated a whole spiral which commodifies the league further. However at this point the commodification of the league is not an externality but an aim for the clubs which ended up with an ownership of the “self-sustaining” type (such as Kroenke of Arsenal FC, Short of Sunderland, Henry of Liverpool). This spiral only occurs in leagues where televising rights (which are affected the most by the commodification of the league) is negotiated and distributed centrally!

Although foreign ownership undoubtedly makes a league more marketable, Nauright et al. (2010) warns us that both players, and the ‘Americanization’ of management/marketing have to be incorporated with moderation into the league otherwise there is a potential that the foreign catalyst displaces the English core.

2.2 Effects on transfer market and wages – Exuberant Inflation

It is important to make a distinction between wages and transfers (eg: one cannot say that Robin Van Persie cost Manchester United £70 million) The reason behind this is because the transfer value can be looked at as an investment where the enterprise acquires an asset. However wages come out on the operating side of the enterprise. Therefore it is vital to keep the two concepts separate from each other. This distinction is more important for regulators (such as FIFA) who want to create financial rules (such as FFP) than it is to the everyday fan but I’d like to ask the reader to keep this in mind when reading through this section.

First let’s look at transfer activity and how foreign ownership has affected it. In order to do this however we have to construct a Price index so we actually know what the real value of the players are. The Bank of England (and every Central Bank of the World) produces Consumer Price Index (hereinafter CPI) which is a comprehensive measure of inflation for consumer goods. However since the football player market is not really a consumer good we cannot rely on CPI data to measure inflation in the transfer market. Fortunately for us Tomkins et al. (2010) already constructed such a figure and termed it the Transfer Price Index (hereinafter TPI). The idea is to take the average transfer values of a base year and see how the average transfer value of players in other seasons compare to this value. The reason we take averages is due to what statisticians call the ‘law of large numbers’ which essentially means that the trends will emerge the more observations we take into account.

If Tomkins et al. (2010) 2011/2012 update is to be believed ever since the creation of the EPL (1192) there has been a rocking 730% inflation on average transfer value. For comparison the Bank of England in the same period recorded a 77,1% inflation in CPI. To put this into perspective: The record signing of £5 million of Chris Sutton to Blackburn in 1994 is today’s average transfer price while the record transfer made by a Premier League side is £50 million submitted by Chelsea FC for Fernando Torres. However it is important to note that TPI doesn’t increase year-on-year which is shown in the figure below.

Image taken from transferpriceindex.com

So some important dates to go with: Roman Abramovich purchased Chelsea FC in June 2003; Sinawatra bought Manchester City in 2007; September 2008 marked the purchase of Manchester City by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan; 2010-2011 season is the first season with the 25-an rule in place the EPL. With these in mind when looking at the above figure we can see that it took 2 not just 1 “project” owned firms competing with each other to have an extensive effect on transfer prices. One might argue that this is logical as the two sides will try to outbid each other which leads to a flurry of astounding bids. Of course every club is aware of the soft budget constraint these firms have and will hold off their supply of players until a huge offer is received. This is the rational behaviour of the clubs as they have to balance the books at the end of the day and selling a player for a vast sum can finance their own transfer activities. However other clubs will be aware of the sell and of the approximation of the transfer sum and they in turn will up their asking price for their own players. A perfect example of this chain reaction is the Fernando Torres and Andy Carroll sale. Liverpool sold Torres for an astounding £50 million to Chelsea and then enquired about Andy Carroll. Newcastle were aware of the Torres sale and told Liverpool that they would only part ways with Andy Carroll for a heftier sum. In the end Liverpool bought Carroll for a massive £35 million. Whether the sum paid by both clubs is reasonable is not the point of this piece but it perfectly illustrates the chain reaction which leads to inflationary pressure on the transfer market.

The drop in transfer prices in 2009-2010 can be attributed to the effects of the credit crunch which led to less transfers which were of lower prices as teams became more risk averse. However such a trend was stopped thanks to the FA with the introduction of the 25-man rule in 2010 as a means to save the English national team. This lead to English players ‘turning into gold’ and their prices shooting up on the transfer market. One just needs to look at Liverpool’s squad and the amount spent to assemble it to see the adverse effects of the 25-man rule. In conclusion: it was a mixture of “project” ownership and the FA’s decision that lead to the inflationary pressures prevailing in the EPL right now.

If you are a theorist and would like to explain the TPI fluctuations in terms of a general model then I feel a good starting point would be the shortage phenomena as outlined by Kornai (1992) mixed with the inelastic supply of players. I will not go much into detail about this in this piece as it would be too much of a tangent from the original question: What are the externalities of a “project” type ownership? Having said that if there is a demand for a piece to outline a general model of transfer activity I will write one up. Just leave me a comment if you would like to read about what I think is a good model to explain transfer prices.

Now let us turn to the wage bill of the big six (Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester United, Manchester City, Tottenham, Chelsea) in the EPL. To some extent wages are more important than transfer prices as Kuper et al. (2012) find that 90% of league position can be explained by the wage bill of a team. Of course this doesn’t mean that the path to glory is to offer your players as much money as you can. Also this 90% correlation between the data doesn’t take into account the incentive schemes put in place via the wage structure of a team. Please note that I will use data up until 2011 because some teams have not yet published their 2012 annual reports at the time of the writing. Also these wage bills represent total wages of a club so they include: first team players’ wages, reserve team players’ wages, coaches wages, board members wages, other staff (medical, scouting, match-day staff) wages, pensions and insurance, and bonuses. Therefore the below figure will have some uncertainty but we are only interested in the general trend which the below figure clearly shows:

Data for Manchester City and Tottenham for the years 2003 and 2004 not available (if anyone knows them please leave it as a comment below and I shall edit the figure)

Tottenham’s admirable performance for the wage bill they have is clearly shown in the figure. They have the lowest wage bill of the big 6 and perform at a level to compete for a Champions League spot. Sure they only made it to the Champions League once but for a wage bill that low compared to other teams that is an achievement worth mentioning. Liverpool’s abysmal wage policy is also apparent in the figure as they have now overtaken Arsenal with their wage bill but have finished several positions below Arsenal. This is surely something Brendan Rodgers will have to address if he is to make it at Liverpool.

From the figure we can see that Chelsea and Manchester City have the highest wage bill which is not much of a surprise if we take into account their soft budget constraints. In fact we can see a sharp increase in Manchester City’s and Chelsea’s wage bill after their sales. The reason behind this is quite intuitive: Both teams wanted to attract big names to the team and since they didn’t have the marketability and tradition of Liverpool and Manchester United they had to lure the player with the help of what they had more of than their competition: money. To lay the blame completely on the teams (“oil money”) and the players (“money grabber”) is not completely justified though as the presence of agents in the modern game definitely play a huge role in the wages the players earn.

The figure above leads to a question which is beyond the scope of this piece but is worth thinking about: Is tradition/football culture a substitute for money in football? Looking at the above figure it can be argued so as it is not unheard of for players to take a wage cut in order to transfer to a team (Arteta to Arsenal) but it is mostly true for players who transfer to a team with a long-standing, proud tradition or to a team with a Champions League spot. Another question that this raises: Once Chelsea and Manchester City cement their place as a consistent dominant force in Europe will they relax their wage bill? It is hard to tell right now but if they do so it will require massive wage restructuring. Whether they aim to do so remains to be seen-

Now let us look at how the wage bills of these teams affect the overall average annual pay of an EPL football player. The argumentation is the same as it was for transfer prices: Chain reaction. I find myself in a fortunate position (again) as sporting intelligence has published the average footballers wages in England from the 1992-1993 to the 2009-2010 season. We have to keep in mind that the figures are merely guestimates so we can’t take their values quote for quote; however we are only interested in the general trend of wages therefore we need not worry about the exact value of the average annual pay of an EPL footballer in a specific year.

Numbers from sportingintelligence.com

From the figure above the reader can see that although wages increase at a tremendous rate in the EPL, compared to the real sector of the economy, foreign ownership doesn’t seem to have any distinguishable effect on average wages. So then why did wages rise so dramatically? Kuper et al. (2012) argue that the rate at which football wages are rising can be explained by the principal-agent problem (note: agent in this case refers to the players not to the players agents. I’m sorry for the confusion this may cause but this is how it is termed unfortunately). They argue that wages have increased as a way to increase incentives and the reason wages have risen at such a preposterous rate is because the effort of football players is unobservable, therefore to minimize shirking the players are offered massive wages and frequent rises to increase the incentives of work. However I argue that the effort of a football player is anything but unobservable. In fact nowadays football practices can be visited, not just games so incentives to perform should already be in place since monitoring of effort is outsourced to the fans for money. I think the answer behind the massive rise in football players wages lies in the presence of players’ agents, and the ability to soak up an operating loss.

The fact that the EPL has become highly commercialised has already been looked at. This has led to more commercial income for all the teams in the EPL, however players’ agents are also aware of this fact and their aim is to appropriate as much of that extra income for their client as possible (within reasonable means of course). Thus as the teams gain more revenue the more agents will want for their client. The presence of agents therefore acts as an inflationary pressure in the football world and the teams with the biggest revenue streams are expected to have the largest wage bill assuming they have a hard budget constraint. The reason teams with a soft budget constraint won’t fit this trend is because they can successfully soak up an operating loss (in the short run). With these two conditions in mind it is not surprising that the 2 teams with the largest wage bill are teams with soft budget constraint while 3rd place is the most financially successful team in the EPL.

The reason players’ agents can act as a catalyst is asymmetric information. These agents know how many teams are in the race for the player he/she represents but the teams negotiating do not. This is a reason why free and cheap transfers are attributed with high wages as there is a potential for many teams willing to match the price. This is also the reason behind high profile players sometimes earning ludicrous amounts: Ibrahimovic reportedly earns over £900,000 a week. This wage is rational given the fact Manchester City and Chelsea might have been interested in the services of Zlatan as well something his agent knew for certain while PSG didn’t.

Now there is a problem with this, which the UEFA has realised: Gianni Infantino, UEFA’s general secretary has said “this [spending spree] may be sustainable for a single club, [but] it may be considered to have a negative impact on the European club football system as a whole. […] The problem is that all clubs try to compete. A few of the biggest can afford it, but the vast majority cannot. They bid for players they cannot afford, then borrow or receive money from their owners, but this is not sustainable, because only a few can win.” What this basically means is that this high inflation in players wages and transfer prices might be sustainable for a very few in the short run but in the long run it may lead to the destruction of several football clubs. Long story short: football is a bubble economy and if it bursts many teams will have to go into voluntary bankruptcy. Teams who have strict financial rules in place won’t really be affected by this; while the teams that are amassing huge debts will be in trouble unless they are able to get rid of their debts.

That’s it for Part 2. Part 1 covered the different types of Foreign ownership. If you missed it click here! Hit the follow button on the right if you don’t want to miss Part 3 which will look at the effects of foreign ownership on youth development and the English national team. The FAs 25-man rule will be looked at as well.

So a trip to Valley Parade to play league 2 Bradford City in the Capital One Cup Quarter Finals! With any luck the lads will be still be on a high after the great win against West Brom and we can move past this round with little difficulty. Mind you I’m sure that’s what Wigan Athletic were thinking last round and look what Bradford did to them, so it’s safe to say we should not take this match lightly. Arsene Wenger was quoted saying “we want to win in normal time” which is good to hear because I don’t think my heart can take another 7-5 win in extra time like in the last round of the Capital One Cup vs Reading.

Looking at how Bradford play and their recent track record they could prove a difficult obstacle to dislodge, they’ve won 10 out of their last 11 matches and progressed to this fixture by beating Wigan on penalties. Against Wigan they basically parked a big fat bus right on their goal box and Wigan simply didn’t have the means to unlock their defense and score. Against us this will be a much bigger risk. While it’s true that Arsenal have been having trouble scoring recently, most of that is due to teams pressing our midfield(particularly Arteta) and not allowing us to build up our nice flowing passing from the back. Bradford play in a 4-4-2 formation which I believe they will deploy rather narrowly against us in an attempt to stifle the midfield with the sheer amount of bodies. But if Bradford choose to play defensively and not even offer a decent counter-attacking threat trying to hold on for a draw and penalties, then i feel that Arsenal will rip them apart even if we play our second string squad players. The likes of Gervinho, Chamberlain, Jenkinson and Rosicky will too much for their defenders to deal with all match if they invite the pressure by playing defensively and by standing off and giving space to our midfielders, the chances will come. One issue we will have to contend with will be the quality of a league 2 football pitch, making passing more difficult but overall I expect us to score a few.

Looking at the players available it will be interesting to see who Wenger selects for this match. There will be the experienced players in the mix like Rosicky, Arshavin, Squillaci and with any luck, Koscielny but also I’m hoping a few of our promising youngsters like Gnabry, Eisfeld and Meade might all start this one. Coquelin is another player who may feature as well as Ramsey, we may even see a midfield of Coquelin, Ramsey and Rosicky starting this match, it just depends how much of a threat Wenger sees Bradford as. The last conundrum will be who starts at Center Forward. Despite some appalling misses in the last match vs West Brom I think Gervinho should be the one up top, partly because I think he could do no worse than his efforts on the wing and partly because I believe Wenger has very little faith in Chamakh to start this one.

Overall I just hope he chooses a solid defense after that shocking 1-4 result at half time vs Reading last round. Bradford City have a very traditional-style pairing up front in James Hanson and Nahki Wells. Hanson is tall and strong in the air, while Wells is small, pacy and a decent striker from range, meaning long balls forward and the subsequent knockdowns are something that our defense must be wary of. I really hope Koscielny is fit enough to start this game as I feel he is the best player we have when it comes to aerial defense and interceptions. I’d also really rather see Szczesny in goal to Mannone as the memories of those weak save attempts vs Fulham come flooding back and the fact that Nahki Wells has scored 14 goals this season already, is cause for real concern.

Bradford City Dangermen: Nahki Wells, James Hanson and Nathan Doyle who is an ex-player from the Premier League at Hull City.

Result Prediction: Tough to call but I think we’ll manage a solid win. Wells can’t be underestimated so 4-1 Arsenal.

Conclusion: This is a Quarter Final, Mickey Mouse Cup or not and Wenger will hopefully take it very seriously. If we field a decent strength squad we should break through their blockade eventually and win the match but be prepared for a frustrating game unless we score early, in which case all hell will break loose as Bradford chase the game.